Nelson's 'Tough' Talk On Crisis Is All Hot Air

June 24, 1985|By Rob Morse of the Sentinel Staff

Congressman Bill Nelson came to Orlando Friday to hold a press conference on the Beirut hostage crisis. It didn't get a lot of coverage, because it was transparently a non-event. The only real news to come out of it was Nelson's opening announcement of a congressional subcommittee's approval of funds to build an access road at Playalinda Beach.

What Nelson had to say about the hostage crisis was remarkable not as news, but as a study in hot air convection, and the strange and contradictory currents hot air can take. It also was a lesson in why government officials should keep quiet during crises like this -- for their own protection if nothing else.

First, Nelson made a prediction: The hostages would be released over the course of the next couple of days.

He based this prediction on the fact that Israel was going to release its Shiite prisoners anyway, the worldwide publicity, behind-the-scene maneuvers by Saudi Arabia, and Jordan's public call for releasing the hostages. This is the Jordan of King Hussein, who once called Shiite Moslems the scum of earth. Nelson was asked if he had any inside information. ''I've had three briefings by the State Department,'' he said. ''They are still adhering to the line that they will not negotiate, when in fact, behind the scenes they are negotiating every way they can. There is a public performance and there is a private performance going on at this particular time.''

The president and the State Department are fibbers, in other words.

The U.S. should learn some lessons from this crisis, said Nelson. These include a return to sky marshals, better intelligence and quicker reaction by the anti-terrorist Delta Force. Also, speaking of President Reagan's comments about the 1980 Iran hostage crisis, he said, ''One of the lessons is to learn that campaigning for president and being president, the realities may be a little different.''

Nelson turned to the emotional issue of retaliation. First, he suggested that it may be appropriate to retaliate once the hostages are returned. He said, ''The fact is, we do know who was responsible. We do have a name, a face and an address.''

What is the name, he was asked. ''Nabih Berri,'' he replied.

Is Berri responsible for the hijacking? ''I don't know the linkage there, but really nobody does except perhaps some of our intelligence teams.''

Should Nabih Berri be targeted for retaliation? ''I'm choosing my words very carefully, I'm not calling for that . . . people should be forewarned, including Mr. Berri, about any future acts that we will retaliate and retaliate quickly.''

Now Nelson seemed to be saying that we should negotiate now and blow them up next time. He said, ''We've got to get our Delta teams ready to move in any kind of event like this, no matter what the cost to lives, American or otherwise.''

One reporter, a former Green Beret, asked Nelson about the performance of the Delta Force so far. ''Personally I wish the Delta team had moved while it was in Algiers,'' Nelson said.

The reporter asked if Nelson knew for a fact that it did not. ''I know for a fact that it did not, and I know for a fact that we didn't have the complete cooperation of Algeria. That we should have had.''

It is very difficult to deploy forces in an uncooperative country, said the reporter. If we didn't have the cooperation of the Algerian government, where should the Delta team have gone?

''Well, that's one of the problems. There are no easy answers to that. If we were going to get them with the Delta team, Algeria would have been the place before they got dispersed all over.''

Nelson began to ask the ex-Green Beret reporter what to do. ''Now, can you . . . Why don't you give us . . . You're the one who's qualified to tell us.'' Later Nelson complained that the U.S. never made terrorists pay the price for previous crimes. ''There has been a lot of tough talk,'' he said, toughly. Would he use air strikes, which tend to result in further hostages?

''I can't answer you specifically because what the kind of retaliation should be would depend on the circumstances in each case. But I'm not limiting any kind of retaliation. Now, I'm not talking about an invasion of Lebanon. That would be counterproductive.''

That indeed would be counterproductive. Bless you, Bill Nelson, for so informing us.